Here are the available materials in State v. Crazybull:

Here are the available materials in State v. Crazybull:

Arthur Lazarus, the general counsel of the Association on American Indian Affairs (and the drafter of the original bill that became the Indian Child Welfare Act), filed amicus briefs in a suit by a Navajo tribal citizen challenging the power of the Secretary of the Interior to approve the Navajo Tribal Council’s ban on peyote use by the Native America Church. The case was filed as Oliver v. Seaton (D.D.C.):

The challenge really was against the Navajo ban, but Mr. Oliver challenged the Secretary’s approval of the ban, alleging that the approval violated the Exercise Clause. An important aspect of the AAIA’s amicus brief was that Talton v. Mayes, which seemingly held the federal Constitution did not regulate tribal power, did not govern the violation of “fundamental rights.”

There’s an interesting effort to compare tribal nations to the American territories here. We know from cases as recent as Puerto Rico v. Sanchez-Valle regarding Puerto Rico’s sovereignty that tribal sovereignty is more robust that Lazarus credits here. Note the conclusion, invoking the axiom that the “Constitution . . . follows the flag,” usually invoked in war crimes commission law like in the Guantanamo Bay cases.

Needless to say, the Navajo Nation was upset that the AAIA threw its support behind the Native American Church and not the tribe.

Mr. Oliver ultimately did not prevail. See Oliver v. Udall, 306 F.2d 819 (D.C. Cir. 1962).
Here.
From the description:
Working closely with the Vice President and the Senior Director of Tribal Partnerships and Policy, the Director, Tribal Law is primarily responsible for leading and collaborating with NWF staff on national policy issues involving Tribal and Indigenous priorities and providing expertise and associated actions on Federal Indian Law and Policy, including improving existing and crafting new policy with a focus on inclusion, equity, and justice as well as NWF’s core values for Tribal and Indigenous partnerships.
The Director, Tribal Law will model the principles and values of NWF’s Tribal and Indigenous Partnerships Enhancement Strategy (TIPES) and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). This position will forge authentic relationships and partnerships across the country to support Tribal Sovereignty; advance Indigenous policy priorities; and work directly with Tribes and Indigenous Peoples to uplift their voices.

Here.
From the description:
The Office of the Provost at the University of Arizona invites applications and nominations for the position of Assistant Vice Provost, Native American Initiatives. Ranked among the top 50 of all public universities in the nation according to U.S. News and World Report, UArizona is the state’s land-grant university, a federally recognized Hispanic Serving Institution and a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities (AAU). Located on the traditional homelands of the Tohono O’odham and Pascua Yaqui Tribes, the University of Arizona is committed to sustaining partnerships with all 22 sovereign Native Nations across the state of Arizona. The University of Arizona acknowledges the sovereignty status of Native Nations and is driven to support self-determination efforts through its Native partnerships and initiatives. The Assistant Vice Provost, Native American Initiatives will establish a vision, set goals, and enhance the university infrastructure to foster a culturally responsive and inclusive campus environment in accordance with the Native American Initiatives 2022-2027 Strategic Plan.

Here are the materials in Walton v. Uprova Credit LLC (S.D. Ind.):


Postscript — Frank Kelley was wrong.
In a follow up to the foster parent intervention article that was published in ProPublica and The New Yorker in October, this week ProPublica published an article on the woman who regularly wrote expert reports supporting foster care placement over parents and relatives.
Here.
Who hired and was paying her in the case that she was being deposed about? The foster parents, she answered. They wanted to adopt, she said, and had heard about her from other foster parents.
Had she considered or was she even aware of the cultural background of the birth family and child whom she was recommending permanently separating? (The case involved a baby girl of multiracial heritage.) Baird answered that babies have “never possessed” a cultural identity, and therefore are “not losing anything,” at their age, by being adopted. Although when such children grow up, she acknowledged, they might say to their now-adoptive parents, “Oh, I didn’t know we were related to the, you know, Pima tribe in northern California, or whatever the circumstances are.”
The Pima tribe is located in the Phoenix metropolitan area.
Here are the materials in Kwate v. Reece Construction Co. (W.D. Wash.):


Details here. Signed editions available at checkout.
You must be logged in to post a comment.